|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:23 pm
Artto I don't believe in any deities I have been presented with so far. It would be silly for me to start listing all the things I don't believe in. You should define your god, and I'll tell you if I believe in it. If, for example, you define god as the universe, then sure. But that's just meaningless semantics. That's exactly why I'm agnostic and not necessarily atheist. For instance, if you were to say God were like the Tao of the Tao te Ching; nameless, formless, gives birth to all with no personal connection to any...I'd be more inclined to agree with you simply because you've given me a more transcendental definition that's simply beyond scientific proof, it has to be more divined through meditation or some other such craft. (Even then, there's still reason for doubt because I have no empirical evidence to support it.) However if you tell me God's a big man in the sky that listens to your prayers and has definitive actions on earth, well, you've stated quite clearly how he behaves now it's just a matter of showing. Since you can't, I adamantly disagree. I'm with Kant on this one. Quote: If one cannot prove that a thing is, he may try to prove that it is not. And if he succeeds in doing neither (as often occurs), he may still ask whether it is in his interest to accept one or the other of the alternatives hypothetically, from the theoretical or the practical point of view.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 9:01 pm
Lateralus Helica Artto I don't believe in any deities I have been presented with so far. It would be silly for me to start listing all the things I don't believe in. You should define your god, and I'll tell you if I believe in it. If, for example, you define god as the universe, then sure. But that's just meaningless semantics. That's exactly why I'm agnostic and not necessarily atheist. For instance, if you were to say God were like the Tao of the Tao te Ching; nameless, formless, gives birth to all with no personal connection to any...I'd be more inclined to agree with you simply because you've given me a more transcendental definition that's simply beyond scientific proof, it has to be more divined through meditation or some other such craft. (Even then, there's still reason for doubt because I have no empirical evidence to support it.) However if you tell me God's a big man in the sky that listens to your prayers and has definitive actions on earth, well, you've stated quite clearly how he behaves now it's just a matter of showing. Since you can't, I adamantly disagree. I'm with Kant on this one. Quote: If one cannot prove that a thing is, he may try to prove that it is not. And if he succeeds in doing neither (as often occurs), he may still ask whether it is in his interest to accept one or the other of the alternatives hypothetically, from the theoretical or the practical point of view. I am also Agnostic, and this goes along with my views as well. To me, I believe there MAY be a god or goddess and that perhaps there MAY even be mulitple gods or goddesses. Perhaps "God" is just a collective conscience of all that there is, or perhaps it is a force. (Yes I believe in the possibility of "The Force" like a Jedi). Everything is made of energy, so perhaps "God" is just energy. Perhaps "God" is not a specific being and is really just everything. <- This goes with my theory on the possibility of it being energy. Perhaps when we die there is nothing, perhaps we will see if any of this world's religions are true, or perhaps we will become gods and goddesses of our own universes. I know these are a lot of "if"s, but that is why I'm Agnostic. I'm open to all possibilities.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 10:18 pm
I realize this is an old post, but I just realized that I never responded. XD So here it is:Starlock brainnsoup For me, the kind of god I think of is all-powerful and omniscient. But I know that there are many other supernatural beings that fall under the term that I don't believe in either. Also, there's no way for me to know every god that's been created by mankind so it's impossible for me to really know that they don't exist. This makes me consider a question. What does it mean, honestly, for something to "exist" or something to be "real?" It seems like a lot of people take this in a very literal manner. For something to exist to me, doesn't mean it must to be measurable by science or be nonfalsifiable. If it exists in your mind - as a thought, an idea, an emotion - that is still a form of existence. So from that standpoint, I don't necessarily believe certain deities LITERALLY exist, but given so many people do, they obviously exist in a NON-LITERAL (abstract, idea, thought-form, whatever) manner and have great power and sway over those who honor them. As for this stuff on the strange nature of the Abrahamic God, I'm convinced there is not one Abrahamic God. Or if there is, we should remember people's interpretation of the Abrahamic God =/= the true nature of the Abrahamic God. Certainly it can exist, but only as a concept. If I think of the Flying Spaghetti Monster then the concept of the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. If I truly believe in Him (It?), that will have real consequences for me. But the FSM will not sprout from my imagination and start answering prayers simply because I believe. Same with any other God.
Quote: brainnsoup Also, and this is off-topic, I'm just clarifying my beliefs, I believe that it's impossible to either prove or disprove God. And I don't pretend to be able to prove that there is no god. Lots of people claim you can, and I agree with them, with some caveats. You can prove or disprove certain specific concepts of the divine provided you limit yourself to certain sorts of evidence standards. Many religious people feel they have experienced proof of their deity through mystical experience, and I respect that as a form of proof, though it isn't something they should expect ME to accept as proof since I did not have that experience. If a deity spoke to me, then I would consider that proof for myself. But I would not consider someone else trying to tell me that they saw a deity proof, nor would I try to use my encounter with that deity as proof to try to convince someone else. Mostly because people can hallucinate, make mistakes, or ultimately lie.
My assertion is this: No person can prove that God (not any specific God, just a God) does or does not exist. I welcome anyone to challenge that.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 12:17 pm
WickedRentSpringAwakening Starlock WickedRentSpringAwakening I have yet to see any religious person who does not literally believe in a god. Not only around me, but also in government. Funny. I see them all the time. Especially as soon as you get out of Western religion and into Eastern religion, or into the more mystical sectors of Western religion. It's everywhere. One simply has to know where to look. And what Eastern religions are you referring to? The predominant religions of the East are all literal god. Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism. Not all Buddhists believe in a literal god. When I was in high school, I took a comparative religions class through our church where we had people of different religions come in and tell us about their religion. The Buddhist guy who came in basically told us that there are two main sects of the religion. One believes in a literal deity called Buddha, and the other sect doesn't worship Buddha as a deity. Rather, they believe that a Buddha is simply a person who has reached enlightenment, and they do not worship these individuals, but rather worship their inner Buddha, their own potential to become enlightened. Clearly, there's no literal deity there. Now, I'm not sure if this form of Buddhism is widely practiced or not, but clearly it does exist, if only for one man. As for Taoism, I was under the impression that one didn't necessarily have to believe in the pantheon of Chinese gods in order to follow the religion, but that could just be a misunderstanding on my part . . . . .
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 7:07 pm
garra_eyes WickedRentSpringAwakening Starlock WickedRentSpringAwakening I have yet to see any religious person who does not literally believe in a god. Not only around me, but also in government. Funny. I see them all the time. Especially as soon as you get out of Western religion and into Eastern religion, or into the more mystical sectors of Western religion. It's everywhere. One simply has to know where to look. And what Eastern religions are you referring to? The predominant religions of the East are all literal god. Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism. Not all Buddhists believe in a literal god. When I was in high school, I took a comparative religions class through our church where we had people of different religions come in and tell us about their religion. The Buddhist guy who came in basically told us that there are two main sects of the religion. One believes in a literal deity called Buddha, and the other sect doesn't worship Buddha as a deity. Rather, they believe that a Buddha is simply a person who has reached enlightenment, and they do not worship these individuals, but rather worship their inner Buddha, their own potential to become enlightened. Clearly, there's no literal deity there. Now, I'm not sure if this form of Buddhism is widely practiced or not, but clearly it does exist, if only for one man. As for Taoism, I was under the impression that one didn't necessarily have to believe in the pantheon of Chinese gods in order to follow the religion, but that could just be a misunderstanding on my part . . . . . The Tao te Ching itself never actually mentions any Gods or Goddesses, although the Tao is often referred to as a creative force similar to one...but not quite. Quote: (Tao) is the child of I-don't-know-who. And prior to the primeval Lord-on-High. Quote: (Tao's) top is not bright; Its bottom is not dark; Existing continuously, it cannot be named and it returns to no-thingness. Thus, it is called the formless form, The image of no-thing. This is called the most obscure. Go to meet it, you cannot see its face. Follow it, you cannot see its back. Quote: There is something that is perfect in its disorder Which is born before Heaven and Earth. So silent and desolate! It establishes itself without renewal. Functions universally without lapse. We can regard it as the Mother of Everything. I don't know it's name. Hence, when forced to name it, I call it "Tao." When forced to categorize it, I call it "great." (Please note that these quotations are from a translation by *Charles Muller. I'll be the first to admit that his version isn't a literal translation, but has been done so that it makes more sense in English. I can pull up a literal translation by Robert Moss that also contains notes on possible other translations of characters and also lists which stanzas were in what discovered texts.) When one speaks of the pantheon of Gods Taoists worship, these are more traditional Gods from Chinese culture in general. You have to remember first that Taoism is more a philosophy than true religion, although it makes enough comments on ethics and moral behavior that you can certainly categorize it as such. You also have to remember that most Chinese aren't just one religion, they also practice Confucianism, Buddhism, etc. When looking at anyone's religious practices from China, you have to know what you're looking for to separate the different modes of thinking and worship.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 11:45 pm
Thank you Lateralus. That was quite informative! ^.^ I looked into Taoism in a very superficial way when I was in a philosophy class in middle school, and that has been pretty much my only experience with it thus far. I tried to read The Tao by Lao Tze (which is what your quotes are from, yes?) back then, and it was a bit over my head, so I sort of just gave up. I'll have to look into it again though. It sounds like the sort of thing that would blow my mind these days. whee
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 8:15 am
garra_eyes Thank you Lateralus. That was quite informative! ^.^ I looked into Taoism in a very superficial way when I was in a philosophy class in middle school, and that has been pretty much my only experience with it thus far. I tried to read The Tao by Lao Tze (which is what your quotes are from, yes?) back then, and it was a bit over my head, so I sort of just gave up. I'll have to look into it again though. It sounds like the sort of thing that would blow my mind these days. whee When reading it one of the things to bear in mind is that the English translations can have a lot of variety. Some go above and beyond literally translating it to make the prose easier to understand in English. A lot of copies will actually make the sage that Lao Tzu promotes a person should be into a female, simply to enhance the aspect of taking the humble, low, female path. If you had trouble reading it before, the Barnes and Noble edition translated by Charles Muller does a good job of making it a bit easier to read. But yeah different translations will say different things, for instance Stanza 7: Quote: Heaven and Earth last forever. The reason that Heaven and Earth as able to last forever Is because they do not give birth to themselves. Therefore, they are always alive. Hence, the sage puts herself last and is first. She is outside herself and therefore her self lasts. Is it not through her selflessness That she is able to perfect herself? Quote: The heavens last, the earth endures. And the reason why they do? By disowning what they yield, Heaven can last and earth endure. So, surely, does the world-wise-lord, Who puts his interest far behind And ends up in the lead, Who puts his interest to the side And ends up safe and whole. Is it not so: That having nothing to own He can achieve his goal?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 9:18 am
Wow. That is different. Sounds like I should pick up a few different translations if I really want get the best grasp of what the original copy said. (actually, it sounds like I should just pass up the translations and learn chinese so I can read the original, but that's a bit more of a time commitment than I'm willing to give right about now)
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 1:41 pm
God is that one guy I dont believe in. He is kinda like Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and sane conservatives. We all want to believe they exist but they dont. Yeah, thats God.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 9:14 pm
MingLeChat God is that one guy I dont believe in. He is kinda like Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and sane conservatives. We all want to believe they exist but they dont. Yeah, thats God. I've given up on anyone being sane. I've just found that people tend to have different types of insanity to different degrees.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 7:02 am
Quote: What is a deity? What are its characteristics? What makes something a deity and what makes something NOT a deity? Main Entry: de·i·ty Pronunciation: ˈdē-ə-tē, ˈdā- Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural de·i·ties Etymology: Middle English deitee, from Anglo-French deité, from Late Latin deitat-, deitas, from Latin deus god; akin to Old English Tīw, god of war, Latin divus god, dies day, Greek dios heavenly, Sanskrit deva heavenly, god Date: 14th century 1 a : the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity b capitalized : god 1, supreme being 2 : a god or goddess 3 : one exalted or revered as supremely good or powerful
This is how I would define Deity. The third definition is the only thing I would not completely agree with. I can see people as being extremly good or powerful, not based on their abilities, but based on their actions.
Quote: Global ideologies (religions or philosophies) answer this question in very different ways, so by telling me you're atheist, you essentially are telling me... nothing! Unless of course I make some assumptions based on the more common ways of seeing the divine in whatever country you happen to be culturally immersed in.
That is probably the best way to look at it. Being Atheist means diffrent things to diffrent people and most likely does have alot to do with whatever country they happen to be in. As cultures are diffrent, so are interpretations of what things mean.
Quote: So here's my challenge. How do YOU define the divine? What SPECIFIC kind of divine-concept or concepts do you lack belief in? Supernatural ones? Transcendent ones? What?
Main Entry: 1di·vine Pronunciation: də-ˈvīn Function: adjective Inflected Form(s): di·vin·er; di·vin·est Etymology: Middle English divin, from Anglo-French, from Latin divinus, from divus god — more at deity Date: 14th century 1 a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god b : being a deity c : directed to a deity 2 a : supremely good : superb b : heavenly, godlike
I would say as an Atheist that anything that is to be said to have come from god, created by god, inspired by god, would be untrue. I think things like art, and so on that can look awe inspireing are just really good works of man. So the work divine can be used, like the example in the definition to me, means, better then usually made, so above others.
As to my definition for god, or why god was created, I think its already been answered. God was created with many purposes. A way to answer questions that seemed to not have an answer. A method of control, and an answer to questions that can not be answered such as, what happens when we die.
Watching kids while writing this so I hope it all makes sense, had to leave the computer several times and to busy to proofread.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 9:17 pm
Lateralus Helica I've given up on anyone being sane. I've just found that people tend to have different types of insanity to different degrees. This statement I am in complete agreement with.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 23, 2010 6:15 pm
I have no disbelief in anything. I am an atheist because I define divine as something better than sentience. Not a higher level of sentience or a smarter one but like the next big advance. First there was matter, then energy, then a bunch of time passed supposedly, then life happens. Sentience upgrades life and what upgrades that? Nothing I can imagine and I ******** pride myself on my imagination. So I believe there is no great big advance after sentience though I fear there may be just one to prove me a bit wacked.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 12:07 pm
I don't know completely know what I do/don't believe in, but I know I don't believe in the God that sits above us with a magnifying glass guiding our every move.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2010 3:02 pm
I hear deity and I think of a powerful or semi-powerful being made by humans to give great wishes or spiteful curses for an almighty purpose. In other words, it's an illustrated character made into reality and then worshiped.
As for WHY I'm an Agnostic Atheist, it is because I have no reason to believe in any deities. I have no proof, reason, or self-experience with any spiritualness of any kind. Because of that, I'm what I am.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|